Claridge Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 For most of the season we have been creating chances but failing to score.now that we have a striker that would take a few of those chances we play 5 at the back.huth and upson are now available so we can change the defence but why change the system that was creating the chances? Kramaric had no chance yesterday as he is not the strongest at winning the ball and that's not his role.ulloa must play with him as we need 20 points to give us any chance of staying up and we will never score enough with 5 at the back. seems like we are playing 5 at the back to make up for Morgan's mistakes in earlier games.half a season with vardy and nugent especially missing chance after chance and now we stop playing the system that created them.not sure Pearson hasn't,t had some form of breakdown or a strong bang on the head. 442 or down by easter
cc_star Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 For most of the season we have been creating chances but failing to score.now that we have a striker that would take a few of those chances we play 5 at the back.huth and upson are now available so we can change the defence but why change the system that was creating the chances? Kramaric had no chance yesterday as he is not the strongest at winning the ball and that's not his role.ulloa must play with him as we need 20 points to give us any chance of staying up and we will never score enough with 5 at the back. seems like we are playing 5 at the back to make up for Morgan's mistakes in earlier games.half a season with vardy and nugent especially missing chance after chance and now we stop playing the system that created them.not sure Pearson hasn't,t had some form of breakdown or a strong bang on the head. 442 or down by easter It's all about personnel, there's nothing wrong with 5 at the back in itself, but yesterday Mahrez and Schlupp needed to pour forward & Mahrez was dire and Schlupp disappeared at HT Against better teams playing defensive-minded Simpson & Konch may be ok, but against 'weaker' opposition RDL & Schlupp should be a must As is changing the formation when it becomes obvious it's not working
Oxfordfox83 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 We were the better team first half yesterday (5 at the back), then not better second half with 4. Not saying 5's the answer, but your reasoning's flawed. The reason we didn't make chances was, mostly, Cambiasso missing passes. That, and Mahrez practising invisibility after 25 minutes. Agree on Ulloa/Kram though-we need someone to stay up...
dbtcity Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 For it to work we need our wingers on there game or at least 1 of them, unfortunately yesterday bar schlupp s assist he didn't look arsed and mahrez was just truly woeful in everything he did or attempted to do, add to that the fact cambiassos passing resembled something I'd expect from junior lewis we were all round screwed from an attacking perspective, defensively I think it works for us (or would if we didn't have a 43 year old who loves to drop a clanger in goal)
Fox92 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Doesn't matter if we've got Lineker or Bergkamp up front in that formation, we'd never score. Play 5 at the back ok, but 1 up front isn't good enough. The 1 - in yesterday's case Kramaric - doesn't have enough support and he's basically chasing the ball for 90 minutes. We've got our defenders lumping the ball forward - except for Upson who looked composed - and it's never, ever going to work. Need to play 2 up front, especially considering we need goals to stay up.
Guest WarehamFox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Well if we play 3 centre backs, the full backs need to be quick and able to get up and down the wing, Simpleton and Kon are not the answer. If we play that system then De Laet and Schlupp have to be wing backs, with 3 midfielder's and 2 strikers!!
I blame Wellens Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Well if we play 3 centre backs, the full backs need to be quick and able to get up and down the wing, Simpleton and Kon are not the answer. If we play that system then De Laet and Schlupp have to be wing backs, with 3 midfielder's and 2 strikers!!Don't think anyone could disagree with that......sorry Pearson does.
Ricey Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It's not the solution Pearson thinks it is. It worked ok against Arsenal and will be useful against Man City and Chelsea, but other than that it won't be much use. Fully expect to see it rolled out on Sunday though.
Mark Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I'd rather have an extra man in midfield. That was the change needed on Sunday, problem is only King and Hammond were available, desperately need an attacking threat in a midfield 3 to support the striker but this is the squad he's put together.
kingfox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Three at the back could work but not a straight back five. Simpson and Konchesky are not the answer when playing a formation like that, they lack pace and it's all too defensive, we need to go with De Laet and Schlupp. I also think three in midfield would be better than two, Hammond has proved how key he can be, if we go with a midfield three. I would get him sitting with James and play Mahrez in front of the two. Then play two up front, get Nugent or Ulloa to support Kramaric, instead of having him isolated as a lone striker. We would then have a strong back three, especially with Huth at the heart of it, we definitely missed him yesterday. We would then have pace in the full-back positions, two players of which can get backwards and forwards better. Two midfielders who are capable of winning possession and keeping it, a creative midfielder who can support the attackers, and two strikers instead of one which in my opinion is a must.
catfordfox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It's all about personnel, there's nothing wrong with 5 at the back in itself, but yesterday Mahrez and Schlupp needed to pour forward & Mahrez was dire and Schlupp disappeared at HT Against better teams playing defensive-minded Simpson & Konch may be ok, but against 'weaker' opposition RDL & Schlupp should be a must As is changing the formation when it becomes obvious it's not working Yeah - this. Playing a defensive five at the back means that Mahrez and Schlupp don't need to worry about defending and can get forward as much as they like to support Kramaric, without leaving us vulnerable at the back. That's what happened against Arsenal - but didn't at all in the second half yesterday until the last five minutes. Mahrez literally didn't have a touch for 40 minutes of the second half, absolutely terrible. Pearson can take the blame for not bringing on Albrighton for either Schlupp or Mahrez (he must seriously hate Albrighton), but not for sticking with a formation that worked last week . Personally I think 5-4-1 can be good for us as long as our key players actually do their job, particularly because its obvious that Kramaric only needs 1 or 2 chances to score (unlike the 25 needed for Nugent and Vardy, and the 6/7 for Ulloa)
SpacedX Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Don't think anyone could disagree with that... I can assure you they do...I suggested it on Saturday on the Villa team thread - apparently Schlupp has made LM/W "his own". I suggested that in employing a wing back system RL and Jeff are a no brainer (but that makes the assumption that our current manager has one) and was flamed for it. Problem is - difficult to include Albrighton which we all know is a huge omission based on recent form. Mahrez would not be so inhibited by a WB system. On reflection Nugent behind Krameric is definitely promising and makes a lot of sense. And yeah, we need Hammond in as a minder.
JoeyB Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Hold on......Against arsenal everyone was saying it worked, and we played football and looked good. The thing about Villa was that they nulified our creative spark, everytime Mahrez/ schlupp got the ball they were closed down by 1/2 men.again its stupid mistakes that cost us, we were the better side, if you look at MOTD they had 3 clips 2 goals and one 1 offside, we had Was hitting the post, James shot, Goal, other bits of build up play. Against Everton I would go:Hamer De Laet Was Huth Upson Konch James Cambiasso Mahrez Ulloa Kramaric Kramic can then drop off like he likes to, to pick up the ball and run at players, Ulloa is there for the target man and Mahrez has got that free role to be the bright spark, James and cambiasso can put the tackles in and run the midfield and then you have Konch and De Laet for your wing backs, thought Konch had his best game this season yesterday,
SpacedX Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 get Nugent or Ulloa to support Kramaric, instead of having him isolated as a lone striker. Apparently - and I'm well informed by the experts on here that Ulloa has no first touch whist Krameric creates his own chances. No - Leo is, when playing well, capable of winning and holding the ball and particularly dominating in the air - although given Nuge's strength in assists I'm liking this idea. Both need to operate in and around the box instead of this garbage that Krameric 'likes to run the channels and create chances alone". Perhaps in RRV HNL...but this is the EPL.
Claridge Posted 16 February 2015 Author Posted 16 February 2015 Hold on...... Against arsenal everyone was saying it worked, and we played football and looked good. The thing about Villa was that they nulified our creative spark, everytime Mahrez/ schlupp got the ball they were closed down by 1/2 men. again its stupid mistakes that cost us, we were the better side, if you look at MOTD they had 3 clips 2 goals and one 1 offside, we had Was hitting the post, James shot, Goal, other bits of build up play. Against Everton I would go: Hamer De Laet Was Huth Upson Konch James Cambiasso Mahrez Ulloa Kramaric Kramic can then drop off like he likes to, to pick up the ball and run at players, Ulloa is there for the target man and Mahrez has got that free role to be the bright spark, James and cambiasso can put the tackles in and run the midfield and then you have Konch and De Laet for your wing backs, thought Konch had his best game this season yesterday, Don't get why we need 3 centre backs? Why not another in midfield who might score or set a goal up.Or Hammong sitting in front of the back 4 to give cambiasso more freedom
JoeyB Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Don't get why we need 3 centre backs? Why not another in midfield who might score or set a goal up.Or Hammong sitting in front of the back 4 to give cambiasso more freedom The 3 centre backs normally add a bit more to the stability of the defence, if you have your full backs pushing on, your CB sit so it still gives you the 3 on 1/2 advantage. Normally it creates a tighter defence, but for the last few games we have made silly mistakes which has cost us.
RedSoxUK Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It's to get more possession and a better footing on the game. Can see how it'll work for us vs Chelsea / Man City which we'll likely use, but It's relegation suicide vs the scrap heap. Has to be 4 - 5 - 1 or 4 - 4 - 1 - 1, The 4 - 4 - 2 can't work for us as we're never in possession.
cc_star Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 The 3 centre backs normally add a bit more to the stability of the defence, if you have your full backs pushing on, your CB sit so it still gives you the 3 on 1/2 advantage. Normally it creates a tighter defence, but for the last few games we have made silly mistakes which has cost us. Doesn't matter how much stability you add if your keeper keeps palming balls to opposing players or puts it in his own net because he finds it difficult to get out of an armchair
JoeyB Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Doesn't matter how much stability you add if your keeper keeps palming balls to opposing players or puts it in his own net because he finds it difficult to get out of an armchair Like i said underneath, its silly mistakes that has cost us. Scwarzer made 2 mistakes in the past 2 games, but we need to cut those mistakes out. Look at Matty James V arsenal, through on goal and his first touch cost him, where as last season he would have scored. Confidence is they key, and were lacking it, but getting rid of pearson won't help long term, short term fix but without the guarntee of us staying up
Claridge Posted 16 February 2015 Author Posted 16 February 2015 The 3 centre backs normally add a bit more to the stability of the defence, if you have your full backs pushing on, your CB sit so it still gives you the 3 on 1/2 advantage. Normally it creates a tighter defence, but for the last few games we have made silly mistakes which has cost us. Dropping morgan and putting huth or/and upson in will tighten the defence though. Bit harsh on Was but he has to go for me as either of these 2 are better and our full backs aren't good enough
psychonaut Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 That was the change needed on Sunday, problem is only King and Hammond were available, desperately need an attacking threat in a midfield 3 to support the striker but this is the squad he's put together. Its possibly the most obvious change required. Our biggest problems have been defensive errors (along with service to forwards) but even with 3 centre backs errors can occur - as an error is an error no matter how many bodies we put in defence. We struggle to gain a foothold in most games and are far too easily overun in midfield - hence posession stats plus zero service for the forwards and a lack of creativity. Having an extra man in midfield - especially a creative player - would almost kill 2 birds with one stone (maybe 3) it would : Allow us to gain more control in the centre of the park by assigning a defensive role to one midfielder - who could also drop back into defence when needed. Take the pressure off our defence (in theory) as there is an extra man applying pressure when not in possesion and giving another option/outlet when in possesion and going forward. Plus we have a creative connection from midfield to attack. Attacking and defending as a unit rather than sitting back and soaking the pressure. Too much pressure on our defence is leading to silly errors.
FoxinNotts Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 With many things, it's not the system, it's the personel. Having a right and a left back, in Simo and Konch, rather than wing backs, ie RDL and Schlupp is our current downfall. The 'system' would alter to a 352, by default, allowing for another central player.
FoxinNotts Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Sorry, just realised, everything I just typed, has already been said! I'll get back under my stone.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.